33 D. Judicial Guarantees and Judicial Protection (Articles 8 and 25 in relation to Article 1.1 of the American Convention) 147. Article 8.1 of the American Convention recognizes every individual's right to be heard before a competent judge or court within a reasonable period of time: Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 148. Article 25 of the American Convention in turn contemplates every individual's right to simple and speedy remedy before competent judges or courts for protection against acts that violate fundamental rights: 1. Every person has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. 2. The State parties undertake: a. to ensure that any person claiming such remedy shall have his rights determined by the competent authority provided for by the legal system of the state; b. to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; and c. to ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted. 149. The Inter-American Commission has stressed on previous occasions the importance of the State's obligation to investigate and punish the perpetrators of human rights violations, and, if necessary, to make reparations to the victim or to this immediate family, when the violation has its origin in agents of the State. 125 In addition, as mentioned before, the State has an obligation to investigate, derived from the more general obligation of guarantee enshrined in Article 1.1 of the Convention, independently of the agent to whom the violation may eventually be attributed, even if a member of the public. 126 150. According to the Inter-American Court's decisions, in order to fulfill its duty to investigate, the State must seek "the truth effectively", must punish the actual perpetrators and the masterminds, and the investigation "must be undertaken in a serious manner and not as a mere formality preordained to be ineffective." 127 This obligation is a matter for the State, since it "has the duty to immediately and ex oficio begin an effective investigation to identify, try, and punish 125 Cf. IACHR, Report No. 36/08, Merits, Case 12.487, Rafael Ignacio Cuesta Caputi, Ecuador, July 18, 2008, 126 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v Honduras. Merits. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. para.66. 4, para.177. 127 para.177. I/A Court H.R., Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v Honduras. Merits. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4,